Does Reel to Reel tape sound superior to vinyl?

[Lance Lawson]

I have never heard a R2R before. How does the sound compare to vinyl? Why didn't R2R succeed like vinyl?

Thanks in advance.

The short answer is most reel to reel tape decks sound better than vinyl. If you can get a 7.5 ips reel to reel tape of a given album and also get the vinyl and then compare the tape against the vinyl the superior sound of the tape will be apparent. Of course you'll need a decent reel to reel tape deck but they can be found. Even the best turntable and cart still can match the RTR. Reel to reel's only true competition is high res digital.

 

[nj pheonix]

Yep, I spent countless hours making cassettes. Now I don't have a cassette to my name. My ex-wife probably tossed them years ago.

You and me both brother!

 

[phantomrebel]

I'll add my $0.02 and say IT DEPENDS. I've heard great condition commercially released 7.5IPS tapes that are inferior to a good pressing of the same album (e.g. Miles Davis's "Kind of Blue"). OTOH, I've heard used, beat up, 3.75 IPS tapes that sound better than the "audiophile" version of the same album (e.g. Beatles "Magical Mystery Tour"). There are way too many factors to generalize which is why I think you need to cover your bases and collect both formats (At least that is what I tell my wife).

Many of the commercially released tapes were recorded at high speed and on low quality tape for mass production. Like cassettes, home recorded reel tapes sound so much better! I'm not alone in experiencing a more pleasing sound after transferring a hi-res FLAC file to a 2-track tape at 15 IPS. It's a strange but common phenomenon, but again depends on many factors, including your equipment.

 

[KentTeffeteller]

Any tape machine requires alignment. Some very high end recorders did most of it automatically.

But not open reel machines except for rare high end professional machines late in the format life. Never in consumer or prosumer. More like Studer A820 territory. Cassette machines is a whole other story, and I do believe top end cassette can and is HiFi, and I enjoy my cassettes too as I do my open reels.

 

[empirelvr]

...More like Studer A820 territory.

What kind of alignment do you mean? If they did self-align, the A820's we use wouldn't be out of our studios getting the once over like they regularly do.

 

[KentTeffeteller]

The Studer A 820 could store the bias settings and electronic alignments. It was the closest thing to the cassette world in open reel.

 

[tuttebenne]

Well, if you have a 1/2 inch (or more likely 1 inch or even 2 inch) original master tape, and a deck that can play it, then more power to you. Otherwise, I think you're dealing with some form of "compression" regardless....

I have an original vinyl '77 copy of Aja, an '80s "Audiophile" version, and the most recently released Audiophile version. They get quieter and more detailed with each evolution. I also am fortunate enough to have a 2nd (or maybe its even a third gen) copy of a safety master of Aja on 15 ips 1/2 track 1/4 inch tape. The latest vinyl version is fantastic. The safety copy is INCREDIBLE. But if you have access to the original mult-track studio tape, please let me know

 

[Northwinds]

The problem with consumer r2r tapes (commercially released albums on tape) is that most of it is, as mentioned before, 5th or 6th generation by the time you're hearing it.
Plus, more often than not, you're playing it on a consumer grade machine.

I have heard many original/first generation 15 IPS tape recordings played on a well-maintained Ampex ATR-102 that would send your head spinning, they sound so phenomenal.

Vinyl is an inferior medium...which is why the studios made master tapes vs. records.

Maybe back in the day, now we have Direct to Disc and DMM recordings. I am not going to slag any medium, even an 8 track has it's place other then the annoying click in the song when switching to another track. I dig RTR but once a tape is damaged, it's glaringly apparent, just like a scratched record which I don't deal with period

 

[Wilhem]

That's ridiculous. Tapes and vinyl will both outlast out lifetimes.

It is not ridiculous at all. Both tape and vinyl deteriorate over time--but to your point, we deteriorate faster.

In terms of the quality of the medium, tape is superior because bandwidth does not change for longer programs as it does for a vinyl recording as the stylus approaches the centering hole. Vinyl can have wider frequency response initially because the groove impressions can be finer than the magnetic wavelengths a head gap can resolve, but the frequency response of tape is uniform from end to end. Both media are very close in dynamic range unless the tape has noise reduction applied to it. The notorious pops and clicks from debris in vinyl grooves is far less of a problem for tape/head contact in a tape recording. The failure of so many tapes due to an unstable binder is for several, but not all, tape manufacturers. Unfortunately, those manufacturers were among the most popular.

As for recorded content, not the medium itself, vinyl was generally superior to tape because of the shortcuts many open-reel tape duplicators took to make their products competitive. Cassette tape duplicators developed high-speed duplication that, with good stock and a good master--often from a digital bin--could produce cassettes that rivaled their LP versions in terms of quality. As for high fidelity, there were many excellent cassette recorders capable of making recordings that were virtually indistinguishable from the compact disc they were recording. BASF challenged listeners to select the cassette from the CD in playback tests. If they got 8 out of 10 correct, they won a pair of Sennheiser headphones. We awarded very few headphones for well over 3,000 listeners, including QA personnel from all of the major music labels. (Two Dolby engineers got all 10 because they listened for a left/right decode delay in the Dolby NR chip used in a Pioneer playback unit--a defect they knew about. A QA engineer from Capitol Records got all 10 when she listened for THD on the peaks of Michael Jackson's Thriller album.)

 

[twiiii]

Hands down a tape is better that all LP's. The only exception might be a direct to disc pressing. But then after the first play an all the little noises start to appear. Tape easily surpasses the LP. There are any where from 4 to 6 generations of deterioration between the original tape and the LP you place on your TT. And that assumes your LP is perfect, which none are. Once you hear a master tape with close to 80 db dynamic range squeezed dow to less than 35 db you will recognize the difference immediately.

 

[tuttebenne]

Hands down a tape is better that all LP's. The only exception might be a direct to disc pressing. But then after the first play an all the little noises start to appear. Tape easily surpasses the LP. There are any where from 4 to 6 generations of deterioration between the original tape and the LP you place on your TT. And that assumes your LP is perfect, which none are. Once you hear a master tape with close to 80 db dynamic range squeezed dow to less than 35 db you will recognize the difference immediately.

I share your assessment of tape's superiority over vinyl. The only thing I would add is that I find most audiophile vinyl gets quieter after the first and sometimes second playing. I shudder to think my stylus is "chasing" the grooves clean of any particles left from the pressing process but this is the only explanation I can think of.

 

[50nstillhifi]

This might be "off topic" perhaps... but recently I "G-willed" a find of some Maxell C60-Professional Industrial P/I-"Communicator Series"-Low noise-high output... cassette tapes. Phew.... that's a mouthful!?

The tapes.. I don't know.. may be several years old, maybe 20? Yet when put in my faithful cassette player, SONY type, the tapes have excellent playback and sound quality. Now I not sure if this is standard Maxell formula.. but it does sound good! In fact, I use the playback to format my CD discs.

I say this to say, the science will prove itself out over the long term... if in 2025 when the first Mars colony is shipped a turntable... and the vinyl plays..

Its a win!

But if i'm around... I will STILL use my tapes : )

 

[Ricktptman]

I run into this all the time on tape forums. It's generational. The oldest boomers (and those before) think non-back coated tape is as good as anybody ever needs. There have been a few famous bad runs of back coated tape, and the resultant sticky shed syndrome is not a pleasant thing with which to contend. But that's happened to less than 2% of all the back coated tapes I own. Pretty much no retail/purchased pre-recorded tape I've EVER owned can stand up to a home recorded tape from a good LP if GOOD back coated tape is used. (The one exception might and only might be channel separation. Good carts tend to hang somewhere in the mid 30 dB range and tape can do a bit better.) Same goes for Cassettes. (There were audiophile pre-recorded Cassettes made. They sound quite good, but they weren't the majority of that market.) There are many fine pre-recorded tapes out there (including some 15ips, 10.5" reels sourced from specialty concerns) but a carefully made (real time duplicated) tape made from a GOOD LP, is pretty hard to beat. IF your TT/Cart is up to the task. Anything that's wrong upstream won't be improved downstream. There's a lot of misinformation about it. But remember, unless the recording was made Direct-to-Disc, ALL records were probably made from a TAPE based master if it was made before Digital formats came along. The people who ONLY bought blank tape, then bought records and dubbed them tend to hold the Cassette format in higher "fidelity" esteem than the people who bought pre-recorded Cassettes exclusively. Between NR alignment mismatches and the conservative recording levels of most mass market pre-recorded tapes, they were seldom pushing the limits of the format. Especially with regard to Dynamics. Happy hunting...

 

[twiiii]

Though I still have all the Maxell UD chrome tapes I dubbed over 30 years ago and my Nakamichi cassette machine, the tapes are played exclusively in my 2001 Dodge Ram diesel. When and if the tape fail or I buy a new truck then everything cassette will be gone. I still make party cassette tapes for friends of mine who choose to keep the format active. I still have about 50 un-openned UD xl Il Chrome tapes to use.

But even with Dolby S, which I don't use, a cassette machine can'n match the quality of a good reel to reel. Revox A-77 MK IV for instance.

 

[MaxxVolume]

I enjoy the "ritual" of tapes (in all formats), as well as the discipline associated with vinyl. Hell, I`m Old School !
Looking for convenience for when we have outdoor parties, and I have too many other things happening to worry about playing DJ, I got into the habit of using one of my better-quality Panasonic or JVC Stereo VCRs to create long-play party tapes....sound quality can be incredibly good if you pay attention to your recording levels. Most better VCRs have a surprisingly high frequency response capability....

 

[Will S.]

The problem with consumer r2r tapes (commercially released albums on tape) is that most of it is, as mentioned before, 5th or 6th generation by the time you're hearing it.
Plus, more often than not, you're playing it on a consumer grade machine.

How is that different from vinyl?

 

[intro6]

As for recorded content, not the medium itself, vinyl was generally superior to tape because of the shortcuts many open-reel tape duplicators took to make their products competitive.

This is what I suspected regarding prerecorded R2Rs that were sold as consumer product back in the day. Of course, not having any personal expertise or even connection to R2R, I could never make any statement myself about this with any certainty at all. Still it seems, one should always separate consumer R2R from professional R2R. Professional R2R was largely done in a very high quality way in order to create a master which was the final product of the recording process. Consumer R2R, on the other hand as you state, largely took shortcuts to keep consumer prices to at least a somewhat reasonable level.

Cassette tape duplicators developed high-speed duplication that, with good stock and a good master--often from a digital bin--could produce cassettes that rivaled their LP versions in terms of quality. As for high fidelity, there were many excellent cassette recorders capable of making recordings that were virtually indistinguishable from the compact disc they were recording. BASF challenged listeners to select the cassette from the CD in playback tests. If they got 8 out of 10 correct, they won a pair of Sennheiser headphones. We awarded very few headphones for well over 3,000 listeners, including QA personnel from all of the major music labels. (Two Dolby engineers got all 10 because they listened for a left/right decode delay in the Dolby NR chip used in a Pioneer playback unit--a defect they knew about. A QA engineer from Capitol Records got all 10 when she listened for THD on the peaks of Michael Jackson's Thriller album.)

I agree completely. Some people knock cassette unfairly based on preconceived notions, I believe. A decent cassette played on a decent cassette deck is much better than many people realize.

 

[50nstillhifi]

Nostalgia.... sounds better... or just plain like the format, I believe "live and let listen".... Or have I "heard that" somewhere before?

 

[MaxxVolume]

This is what I suspected regarding prerecorded R2Rs that were sold as consumer product back in the day. Of course, not having any personal expertise or even connection to R2R, I could never make any statement myself about this with any certainty at all. Still it seems, one should always separate consumer R2R from professional R2R. Professional R2R was largely done in a very high quality way in order to create a master which was the final product of the recording process. Consumer R2R, on the other hand as you state, largely took shortcuts to keep consumer prices to at least a somewhat reasonable level.



I agree completely. Some people knock cassette unfairly based on preconceived notions, I believe. A decent cassette played on a decent cassette deck is much better than many people realize.

Also agree....I have a TEAC R-888X cassette deck, which was fairly high up in the TEAC food chain, it`s a 3-head deck with manually-adjustable bias and dbx. Dubbing a decent CD onto a good quality tape (UDXL-II or TDK SA-90), using dbx, yields a tape that`s virtually indistinguishable from the CD. I still have all my cassette tapes from 30+ years ago, and they still sound impressive.

 

[50nstillhifi]

Also agree....I have a TEAC R-888X cassette deck, which was fairly high up in the TEAC food chain, it`s a 3-head deck with manually-adjustable bias and dbx. Dubbing a decent CD onto a good quality tape (UDXL-II or TDK SA-90), using dbx, yields a tape that`s virtually indistinguishable from the CD. I still have all my cassette tapes from 30+ years ago, and they still sound impressive.

What you so well stated..... Its an "old school secret".... we (old schoolers).... continue to enjoy.. !